How Much Did MALC`s Pretend Hearings Cost Texas Taxpayers?
by TexasGOPVote on April 29, 2010 at 2:52 PM
The following was sent in from the Republican Party of Texas:
The Mexican American Legislative Caucus held what it described as a "Special Hearing on State Board of Education" all day Wednesday, April 28. This "hearing" had no legal power, as the MALC has no legal standing to conduct hearings. MALC is not a state House or Senate Committee. It is a political caucus.
MALC tried to badger State Board of Education Chairman Gail Low into attending the spectacle, even though as a political caucus, MALC has no power to hold hearings whatsoever.
During MALC's all-day hearing, politics repeatedly dominated. The "hearing" featured a grandstanding political speech by Michael Soto, the Democratic Party's nominee for SBOE Place 3. The usual assortment of leftwing interest groups, from the Texas Freedom Network to the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund (MALDEF), got their moment in the sun to talk up leftwing anti-SBOE talking points.
It became clear that MALC's liberal agenda is to abolish the elected State Board of Education, and replace it with unelected bureaucrats. The Texas Democrats evidently agree with that agenda, since they have been cheerleading MALC's dress-up party from the sidelines.
And at least one state employee was used throughout the day in the "hearing" itself.
"If MALC wants to get in touch with their inner children, play dress up and have a pretend committee hearing, I'm sure they can rent a community center somewhere and have themselves a ball," said Republican Party of Texas spokesman Bryan Preston. "But holding a blatantly political pep rally on the Texas taxpayer's dime may be a little more serious. It may be an unethical and illegal use of state resources."
At issue is whether MALC's pretend hearings run afoul of HR3 from the 81st legislative session, which the members themselves set forth and governs how political caucus groups can and cannot use state resources.
1. Why is MALC - which accepts donations from nonmembers and special interest groups - holding a mock hearing in the state capitol?
2. Why did they use state staffers?
3. Were other state resources and personnel used to facilitate their pretend hearing in any way?
4. Did any of the state Representatives who attended claim per diem for April 28th, 2010?
5. What is MALC's agenda, and why was its pretend hearing so politically one-sided?
6. Why did a hearing supposedly about education standards veer off into irrelevant topics like the controversial Arizona immigration law? And why were Democrat SBOE candidates allowed to give stump speeches and bash our state's elected SBOE?